Why do people not vote for a third party candidate...?

Question

When they believe that candidate is the best choice, just beacuse they feel like they are "wasting their vote"? If everyone who believes in a third-party candidate would vote for them instead of picking the lesser of two evils out of the mainstream candidates, perhaps it wouldn't be "wasting your vote."

Answer 1

They feel they are wasting their vote.

Answer 2

I think it's because the two major parties have realized that running extremely polarizing candidates works in their best interests. Nowadays you don't see a "lesser" of two evils, you see a slightly bad candidate and a dark, soulless, pitiless monster of a candidate. No matter which of the major parties you belong to. Sure Kerry was bad, but Bush was the devil! Or, conversely, Bush wasn't the best choice, but Kerry is evil incarnate! Consequently people have the mindset that even if they're not crazy about their candidate the best use of their vote is to keep one of the major candidates OUT. It's a defensive vote, cast not for their candidate but against someone else. People feel that they have to get the maximum mileage out of their votes. And if they vote for a third party then they don't help put anybody in or keep anybody out, they're just "wasting" what little influence they have. Yes, the wasted vote idea is a myth. But good luck convincing people of that. The way to overcome this mindset is, strangely enough, to run more moderates as major candidates. If people felt okay with either party then they'd be more willing to use their vote to send a message. Which is why the democrats will run people like Hillary, and the republicans will run people like McCain. By giving us the choice of bad vs. terrible, and making sure that third party candidates are perceived as "nutjobs" or "wingbats", then the major parties will keep their strangle hold on American politics. People don't vote for third party candidates because they're convinced that it would be a wasted vote. And thanks to dems and reps running the WORST their party has to offer, they'll be able to easily convince people of that.

Answer 3

The United States has become set in its ways. The last time a third party candidate had even a chance was when Theodore Roosevelt ran with the Bull Moose Party. Overall the country is pretty conservative and does not take to change very well, and since the Republican-Democrat Party split in the 1800's those have been the two dominant parties, although the Whigs were popular in the south until the Civil War when they were more or less absorbed by the Democratic Party.

Answer 4

Because they don't expect the third party candidate to win. It shouldn't be thought of as wasting a vote, because when a significant percentage of the population chooses a third party, then the two mainstream parties have to think about how to incorporate the third party's ideology into their platform in order to win back those votes.

Answer 5

It isn't so much a matter of wasting your vote. It's more a concern along the lines of, "I cannot trust a dem candidate for whatever reasons, I cannot trust a rep candidate for whatever other reasons, but if I vote for the ind candidate, that takes away a vote from the less evil of the two major party candidateswho 95% of the sheeple will back no matter how transparently evil they are"

Answer 6

I believe it is a waste of a vote to keep voting for the lesser of two evils. I've always said this. You still get evil no matter who you vote for in that case. I've never voted for Dem or Rep in my life of voting since 1980. Since the 90's, I've been voting Green party candidates because they are closer to my values. I voted for Nadar in both elections and I'll vote for him again if Hilary wins the Democratic election and he runs.

Answer 7

well, nobody actually votes 3rd party candidates in power. Anyway, if a 3rd party candidate wins an election, you have 3 different voting blocs, and then say for example

24% vote independant
36% vote republican
30% vote democrat

then you've got a 3way deadlock, which no real party wins a majority, and you don't get much legislation plans.

Answer 8

A well thought out vote from your conscience is never a wasted vote, no matter what someone else may think. A vote is saying that "this is the way I feel" and to vote for someone you do not truly support would be lying to that candidate and to yourself.

Answer 9

We have a two party system, and until that changes, voting for a third party candidate in anything other than a local election will be tantamount to throwing a vote away.

I vote for third party candidates when I can, just to give them the maximum vote percentage possible. It almost never even reaches 5% in a national election though.

Answer 10

Well, it all depends on where you live.

The liberals in swing states that voted for Nader in 2000 or 2004 made a really really dumb choice!!

Now if you live in lets say, NY or MA (which have almost always voted Democratic), then yeah, go ahead and put in a vote for the 3rd party. Mine as well since your state will go one way anyhow regardless.

Answer 11

In addition to being too dim witted to think for themselves, the average voter thinks that the image of Katie Couric telling them that "Melvin Cowznofski is not a viable, electable candidate" is a real person that will ridicule them for not voting for a media-approved candidate.